Interesting article, worth the time to read..
http://www.techreview.com/articles/taubes0402.asp?p=0


I like the closing paragraph, especially..

quote:

---

�This whole story has been one of every organization that has had a responsibility basically looking for a way not to do their job,� he says, while he ticks off the names of the various organizations that chose to duck the issue rather than legitimately pursue an investigation. The list runs from the Defense Department to the Justice Department to the FBI and Congress and probably the GAO and, finally, to MIT. �It is,� says Postol, �a failure of leadership at every level. It�s a kind of shoddy work at every agency of the U.S. government with responsibilities. And now the president of MIT doesn�t want to deal with the problem either. So it�s going to escalate.�

---

Makes you think a little, if those responsible for protecting US citizens, are lying at EVERY stage and with the coercion of almost every agency and organisation involved, in this one specific and crucial affair, just what is their behavior like in all other arenas?.

Missile defense technology really seems to be a pointless waste of time and money, since especially in this case, if anyone were actually to fire a real missile at the US, the system would almost certainly fail to distinguish a real missile from a decoy, and let's face it, this is an area where failure should not be an option..

Also interesting is the attempt of the FBI to persuade Postol to read a classified document, thereby disabling his ability to legally talk about information he acquired from other non-classified sources. Underhanded to say the least.

1) The Dept of Defense does not share its technological capability with a herd of misinformed junkiee wastes of skin like the American people. Dont think they dont know how to spot a decoy.

2) The reason people havent fired missles at us already is because of our historical ability to retaliate or detect, not some lunatic liberal fantasy of a desire for peace. Not advancing our own defense technology while the world moves forward with missles is suicide.

3) There is no reason not to have a missle shield. Its a fucking shield. How could anyone on the planet object to a fucking shield?

4) Criticising missle defense technology is the new outlet for typical envious anti-military faggots and communist intelligentsia hypocrites who invent causes to justify their tenure.

5) Any party, no matter how benevolent in appearance, will only advocate the lowering of defenses if it means to attack. There is no other reason to the rest of the world that justifies people not defending themselves. Again, its a fucking Shield.

Did you actually bother to read the article?

It appears you didn't.

Do you have even a basic grasp of physics and/or infrared technology, imaging technology or pattern recognition?

It appears you do not.

Nothing in the article said that there shouldn't be a missile defense system. However, it DOES suggest that a useless defense system is worse than no system at all. If the missile defense technology cannot tell the difference between a decoy and a real warhead, how is it supposed to remove that warhead?.

Really, I'm mystified as to why you bothered to post the things you did, since you make yourself look like a complete fool, who didn't take the time to actually comprehend the point of either the article or my post.

I still say the best way to take a nuke out in flight is with another nuke.

>>>Do you have even a basic grasp of physics and/or infrared technology, imaging technology or pattern recognition?<<<<

Nope.

>>>>>It appears you do not.<<<<

You do?

>>>>Nothing in the article said that there shouldn't be a missile defense system. However, it DOES suggest that a useless defense system is worse than no system at all. If the missile defense technology cannot tell the difference between a decoy and a real warhead, how is it supposed to remove that warhead?.<<<<

How is the article supposed to know the intent of the highest levels of the Defense Department? Do you think the press thought of something a 3 conference of lifelong generals didnt? Sad. Maybe how it works just is a fucking SECRET. Maybe, just maybe, every idiot in America being able to find out the intricacies of a super-sensitive national security shield is not a good idea...

Yes, I do actually. I have an incredibly good grasp of physics, and have done a lot of work on mathematical modelling and imaging systems. The way they're attempting to identify the missiles is essentially the same way an astrophysicist identifies stars and other objects in space, except they're trying to do it in a relatively short period of time.


You know, you really SHOULD read the article if you're going to keep trying to argue like this. It's not "the press" that's investigating and talking about this, it's an MIT professor, and a group of people who worked on the bloody project. Does a general have a grasp of science?.. uhhhh.. of course not, they pay people to do that. Any defense system is built, designed and tested by scientists and engineers, not soldiers.

But just in case you fail to read the article for a third time, here's some salient points..

quote:

---

Ted Postol�s credentials as a serious analyst of military defense systems are impeccable. Trained at MIT as a nuclear engineer, he spent five years doing basic physics research at the Argonne National Laboratory in Illinois before moving to Washington in 1980 to work with the U.S. Congress�s Office of Technology Assessment. At the time, he says, he believed the steadily growing U.S. and Soviet nuclear arsenals �would get us all killed� and that Washington was where his influence could help avert this fate. He spent two years at the technology assessment agency analyzing, among other things, deployment of the MX nuclear missile, and another two working as senior scientific advisor to the chief of naval operations in the Pentagon.

---

quote:

---

when the Gulf War broke out, Postol made his first overtly public appearance as a whistle-blower on the issue of antiballistic missiles. The subject was the Patriot missile system, which won near universal acclaim for what appeared to be its remarkable ability to shoot down the Iraqi Scud missiles. In the few short months of the war, according to the official U.S. Army tally, Patriot missiles shot down 45 of the 47 Scuds that they were sent forth to engage. As a result, the Patriot had become what the press would call �Exhibit A� in the push for a national missile defense program and, in the words of the first President Bush, �proof positive that missile defense works.� A convinced Congress promptly doubled the funding for national missile defense, allocating more than $800 million in 1992.

But Postol was skeptical. Using as his primary data televised video of Patriot-Scud engagements, he asserted that the Patriot almost certainly missed all the Scud warheads at which it was fired. Simply put, �The Patriot didn�t work,� says George Lewis, who worked with Postol on the Patriot analysis and is now associate director of the Security Studies Program at MIT.

Pentagon officialdom was not amused. The Defense Department launched an investigation into whether Postol had committed security violations and slapped a classified rating on his 1992 article in International Security, the journal in which he made his case against the Patriot. Raytheon, the Lexington, MA-based company that built the Patriot, also attacked Postol�s credibility and his analysis. Raytheon officials accused Postol of doctoring the video footage to make his point, and then claimed that his analysis was fundamentally worthless.

In the end, Postol�s assessment of the Patriot�s performance would be vindicated, but it would take years. Even the Pentagon eventually admitted that the Patriot had failed (though Raytheon still insists otherwise), while an independent American Physical Society panel reported in April 2000 that the criticisms of Postol�s analysis had been �without merit.�

---

Yeah, obviously the government wouldn't lie to us about missile defense systems..

All that said was our missles shot down other missles, but he disagreed. Maybe, again, get this, MIT professors whose comments end up on the internet, do not and should not know, how sensitive national security shields work.
And I didnt say the generals knew the science of it, I said the generals would think of battling decoys, since they themselves would send decoys.
Why cant decoys be shot down with real ones anyway?

ARGH.

READ THE ENTIRE FUCKING ARTICLE.

I refuse to listen to your inane comments until you read the article.

All that said, was that his analysis was correct in the previous instance, and the government had lied, and eventually admitted that he was right about the system.

I see. So the Dept of Defense, in dealing with the highest levels of security, lied to him and everyone, then came forward and said he was right.
How come you believe they lied the first time, and not when they said the guy was right? Do you honestly believe the most powerful military in the history of the planet, with the most advanced, out of this goddamn world technology and a massive budget, dropped the ball and forgot to account for something simple?

Why are you paying attention to any spin about the missle shield? Nothing that will come forward will be remotely close to truth; if it was, wed already be nuked.

Oh yeah, god forbid the american military would actually make a mistake..

Tell me, how easy do you think it is to shoot a bullet out of the air with another bullet?.

Did you read the article yet?

relatively easy if the first bullets path and trajectory were tracked, or marked at just 3 points the rest could be determined including time of arrival, and times of future positions.

the math from here is relatively simple, if i want to intercept point a from point b, i just need to know the speed, which will give me down to the split second firing time, which can be automated from a computer.

if satellites can tell me what year a quarter on the ground was minted from space,

they sure as hell better be able to track a fucking saturn v rocket which is similar to the size of an icbm.

and a 30 minute wait time, a freshman in algebra has enough time to work the math out on paper before the bomb hits.

in fact i'm willing to bet that every opponent of the missile shield has a checkbook calculator because they can't even carry 10 in their head.

has everybody forgotten about america patriot missiles which would take out scuds in the gulf war,

with what a 5 minute warning system opposed to half an hour?

we're already shooting bullets out of the air with other bullets and have been doing so for more than 10 years now.

Look, I dunno why I even bother replying, but seriously, if you're gonna respond in this way, READ THE GODDAMN ARTICLE.

"Whistle-blower: Nira Schwartz showed that the antimissile system would be unable to distinguish a missile from a decoy. (Photo by Mary Ellen Mark)"

i did read the GODDAMN article.

i don't know to many patriot missiles that took out clouds.

what's the big fucking deal if it does take out a decoy.

i hope to god we plan for more than one shot.

look, i dunno why i even bother replying, but seriously, if you're gonna respond this way, READ A GODDAMN PRO-SHIELD ARTICLE AS WELL.

really two differing points makes you more well rounded.

i also love how EVERY related link is anit-missile shield.

that website couldn't be biased could it?

considering it's an mit website, quoting an mit professor.
http://www.findarticles.com/cf_natrvw/m1282/10_52/62241933/p1/article.jhtml?term=

there's a pro missile defense shield site for you.

Most patriot missles did not work because they were beyond effective range by the time they detonated. Now with a nuclear weapon the emp would disable a warhead at up to 3-4 miles. truly hitting a bullet with a bullet.

How about rather than the American idea of Defence and Offence, they work on not being so freaking offensive so they don't have to worry about their citizens being in danger because of their own agendas. Really who's fault is it that terrorists and such target america and kill americans? It is the fault of the government, not their lack of protection but more their lack of tact when it comes to foreign policy.

Shooting missles out of the air is possible but does require some expensive technology. What's with the huge argument?

Alan I'm sure I speak for the entire planet when I say I'd rather have a city blown up than radioactive debris atomized in the upper atmosphere. Too bad it's got to be someones city, but there are other options.

The govt released nuclear debris into the atmosphere in the 50s and 60s and all it did was increase cancer some. Thats not really a problem compared to nuking a city, which would still release the debris, but also initially kill 20 million people. My father's uncle volunteered to fly through radioactive clouds so the Air Force could test the effects of a nuclear strike on pilots scrambling against it or some shit; he has colon cancer. Thats not very bad compared to 20 million people dead and infrastructures permanently erased.

>>>How about rather than the American idea of Defence and Offence, they work on not being so freaking offensive so they don't have to worry about their citizens being in danger because of their own agendas.<<<<

How would this prevent the rise of an equally pushy "offensive" power from treating us bad?

>>>>Really who's fault is it that terrorists and such target america and kill americans?<<<<<

The American govt and Israel. Is it our duty as poor bastards who just live here to suffer for the actions of Israel?

>>>>>It is the fault of the government<<<

Exactly. Do you think a nuclear strike on a population city would hurt the population, or the government?

>>>>not their lack of protection but more their lack of tact when it comes to foreign policy.<<<<

With enouh protection, anyone can be as tactless as they want.


>>>>Shooting missles out of the air is possible but does require some expensive technology. What's with the huge argument?<<<

Some people who hate the idea of superiority and sovereignty see a missle defense system as an unfair means of defending things; these people traditionally hate all things connected to martialism and any worldview that allows for strife. Building a missle shield acknowledges the reality that people threaten and harm other people; a reality most liberalistic emasculated world citizens try and ignore and suffocate daily (With threats and harm lol)

I think a missile shield is a good idea.

I think a missile shield that doesn't work is just plain stupid..

The entire point of the system that the article discusses is that there is only ONE missile defense unit, which has approximately 60 seconds to identify and destroy the correct warhead, using force of impact alone.

Prof. Postol isn't even against missile defense.. In another article on the same site, he describes an example system he believes has far less technological flaws, which would destroy *all* the objects shortly after launch, rather than waiting and trying to successfully pick the warhead out of a bunch of objects.

The really startling thing that comes out of the tests they did on this system, is that during the test, the onboard coolant systems failed, (IR technology used required a maximum temperature in order to perform to specifications), so regardless of anything else, the test should have been called a failure by ALL concerned. Instead, it was reported as a success..

The patriot missiles almost certainly failed to miss every single target they were aimed at, a fact that the pentagon eventually admitted. The only people who still believe the patriot missiles worked are the company that made them, and poor misguided souls.

Honestly though, if any of you have ever studied any kind of science, you would see that what they are attempting to do is find a needle in a haystack. In any group of objects, travelling at high velocity, measuring anything at ALL accurately over a 60 second period of time is virtually impossible. Measuring relative brightness fluctuations of objects and using that information as a basis to decide which is the warhead is also virtually impossible.

For example, if the warhead is concealed inside a balloon like object amongst a group of other identical objects, the kill vehicle absolutely has NO WAY to tell the difference. There are no emissions, no other defining characteristic that would correctly choose the warhead versus decoy.

And if you're only gonna destroy one of those objects, you'd better hope you accidentally pick the right one.. (the only way this system would actually succeed).

Oh, and by the way, MIT doesn't support Postol's position, and have put pressure on him in the past to stop his activities..

I really don't care whether your position is "pro-shield" or "anti-shield"

Point is, either way, if you're gonna have a system, it better fucking work.

The other point is, if youre going to defend your nation from the gravest threats, dont let any ass rammed cock chugging double teamed nigger loving slut online know how its going to be done. Why cant you understand that?

i think that 60 second warning thing is a farce,

i've heard they try to identify from a meteorites and such within 60 seconds so that retaliation methods can be examined within a 29 minute time slot,

if russia or china could launch missiles that arrived in the united states in 60 seconds, then they must really be on to something scientifically that the failed to let us in on, and their space program should be the envy of the world.

we wouldn't want to launch a counter attack because a meteorite entered the atmosphere,

and as i stated earlier, speed and point of impact can be determined by just three seperate photos,

there's 20 minutes gone by.

i'm sure a trajectory calculation program has been laid in at every defensive position so that the coordinates and speed just need to be entered, if a program hasn't been written to do that as well.

21 minutes gone by,

which leaves a 9 minute window of opportunity open to eliminate the target.

which means it'a already on it's way down,

millions of peoples lives determined in a 9 minute frame of reference is the need for the 60 second identification,

because in reality it's less than that, unless you catch it right at lift-off.

let's give them a 5 minute launch delay,

which leaves 4 minutes to determine effectiveness and the fate of a city.

and yes i know full well that not all patriot missiles were successful,

we are of course looking at the same game plan only with 5-10 minutes of launch to detonation time,

the fact that any of them worked at all was probably enough to push a misssile defense shield forward,

as any common sense will tell you the longer you have to accomplish something the better chance of success you have.

and i'm quite positive this is the way they are going to go about it, i've seen shows on discovery about our missile warning system that has an alert about every 6 hours, that's how often something enters our atmosphere, meteor, satellite, nuke, or alien what is it,

60 seconds...

tick, tick, tick, tick.

even if initial phases are less successful, i have enough confidence in our scientists to make it work,

it's better than doing nothing, and saying fuck it you'll die anyway.

in fact i recall one scientist saying, it's harder mathematically to put a probe in orbit around mars than it is to target a atmospheric projectiles.

and we've put shit in orbit around neptune.

shit i figured out an effective way and i'm just a little programmer shit with a background in physics.

imagine what a masters in the motherfucker can do.

blah blah blah..

Yes, it's quite possible to track the missiles. I didn't say it wasn't.

Yes, they use satellites (not meteorites) to do so.

Now, let me explain this carefully, step by step.

They detect the missile during the launch phase, which lasts around 600 seconds. They detect it because of the emissions of the launch engines. Once they've reached the correct altitude and heading, those engines shut off.. So effectively, you've got a bunch (including the decoys) of objects heading towards the US.

US launches it's "kill vehicle".

Kill vehicle has to catch up to those objects, warhead plus decoys.

It does so.

It uses infrared sensors to measure the brightness of the objects, relative to surroundings, each other and with respect to time. Thus, for example, the theory goes that a sphere will have a constant brightness, since no matter whether revolving or not, it has the same cross sectional size to the sensor on our kill vehicle, thus the brightness doesn't fluctuate.

Following so far?..

Now, for example, a cylinder, tumbling end over end, will have brightness that varies periodically, as the end, and then the length of the cylinder is displayed to the sensor. Thus we can deduce from simply measuring the brightness of these two objects with respect to time, roughly what shape they are, and distinguish the sphere from the cylinder (our dummy warhead)..

Note, the kill vehicle is only in range to make these measurements for 60 seconds, during which time it has to take the measurements AND make the decision as to which object is the warhead.

See, that's where the MINUTE comes in.

Now, once it's made those measurements and decided, it rams into it's chosen warhead, removing it effectively from it's flight path, and at the same time, avoiding detonating it.

But, the problem is, in all the tests, the kill vehicle failed to distinguish the warhead correctly. In fact, the only time it succeeded was when the other decoy objects in the test were significantly larger spheres, and when the warhead was deployed so that it did in fact tumble end over end... In other words, the test was rigged so that it was impossible for the kill vehicle to fail.

Now, note, only ONE kill vehicle is deployed. That means if it fails to pick correctly, you can kiss your ass goodbye.

"as any common sense will tell you the longer you have to accomplish something the better chance of success you have."

Yeah, which is why any system which depends on a 60 second (and that's at optimal atmospheric conditions) window, is inherently unsuccessful.

quote:

---

The other point is, if youre going to defend your nation from the gravest threats, dont let any ass rammed cock chugging double teamed nigger loving slut online know how its going to be done. Why cant you understand that?

---

Point is, random insults do nothing to dull my grasp of the physics underlying their system, THIS system which I am criticising. Sure, if they have an accurate one out there, great, wonderful. Spending billions of dollars developing a completely non-functioning prototype as some kind of double blind seems rather counter-intuitive to me...

But then of course, I can understand your point of view "spirit".. You don't have any logical points to make, so you descend to childish name calling.. As usual.

The insults are just because I hate you; but even you cant be so dull as to miss their point. You are a plebian, they are triple PhD astrofucking physicists. Anything you thought of, they did. But again, you are a plebian. Theyre not going to tell you how it works.

Um, astrophysicists look at the stars, dumbass. Anything outside the earth's atmosphere, not inside it..

And, dumbass, how come it doesn't work then, if they can think of everything I thought of?.

Obviously the insults are to hide the fact that you have nothing to say.